June 19, 1998

EX was LIT that Keith changed his mind regarding their agreement with the Court Counselor. She called AND wrote a letter, postmarked June 22, 1998. Keith told her it was NOT my idea, NOT my fault that he changed his mind, and that the “agreement” had been all in the Ex’s favor and he wasn’t going to discuss it anymore.

Before Keith had court, he was doing his investigations of his ex and her past. He asked me to help him, as he would be working, so I did. The ex got wind of it. In his letter she wrote, she wrote that I was invading her privacy, which was a joke. I didn’t pass myself off as her friend either as she said I did. Every thing I did and the person I spoke to are all a matter of public information. It makes me laugh that she tattles on me, as if Keith didn’t know what I was doing. ANYWAY….

About the agreement they made with the Court Counselor, and Keith changing his mind, she accused Keith of lying, saying, ” you signed a copy of the agreement, then you walked back in 5 minutes later to change your mind. Why did you lie and fake an attempt to work it out? what a waste of time that was. You were too nervous, of what? this is our kids live we are talking about. I feel sorry for (the kids) because they don’t get any voice in this at all and you are going to force them to do things that they do not want to do.” (UM, didn’t she TELL Keith to take her back to court?)

She went on to say she wanted to know if he knew I made phone calls to San Diego. Of COURSE he did, LOL he’s the one that gave me leads to go by. Then she goes on to lie:”I also asked you if we could work this out about visitation several times and you ignored me and told me to shut up. I kept stating that I wanted to work this out so that the judge didn’t have to. ” then she got WAY too funny! she said, “You said you knew about the calls to San Diego. You asked her to call so you could get her more involved with my personal life. You also said that after she had made the telephone calls you both discussed me and how much we used to love each other. You also talked about how you did not want a divorce because you still loved me.” LMAO, actually, what he told me happened was, she was getting ready to go out on a date, and she asked him if they could get back together and he said, “Not only is it a no, it’s a HELL no!”

She told him that on June 18th, just yesterday, that I called their daughter while the ex was at work. It was, after all, her birthday. The Ex said I had no right at all calling the kids, and that if I want to talk to them, I can when and if they visit. She demanded of Keith that he not let me call her house again that I have no reason to. I am not their parent and that I have continued to cause hard feelings in her home and all of them, including the kids do not want me to interfere anymore.

She spewed a lot more crap then said she called a second time today and I told her Keith was eating and hung on her. She said I claimed he would call her back, which in fact he didn’t and she called back two hours later and Keith was still eating, and I had hung up again and didn’t let her speak to him. Well, she did call and I did say he was eating and asked if he could call her back, she didn’t answer, so I said, “He’ll call you back” and I hung up. She did call again, and I told her he was still eating and asked if he could call her back, she was quiet, so I told her he would call her back, and I hung up.

He was eating, but more importantly, she just wanted to hassle him. THAT was a given.

Letter from L

Keith got a letter from L today. she dated it 6-20-98. It was postmarked June 22 and June 23. She asked how he was doing, and that she was fine. She told him Happy Father’s day and apologized that she did not give him anything so she was writing this to him Happy Father’s Day. She wrote, “I love you always.” She asked about Thomas, that she bet’s he’s fine. She’s so funny, she wrote, “He just a little godzilla or JR. godzilla” LOL. she said she had to go now that she will call soon to, and to tell everyone she said Hi. “Love L” with a bunch of X’s and O’s.

Under the Guise of…

The ex called at 7:13 am this morning. She called under the guise of a check she sent to Keith that she failed to realize 12 days earlier she hadn’t gotten the support check. She told me she was stopping payment on said check she allegedly sent, blah blah blah. I told her I had no idea what she was talking about and preferred she spoke to Keith. She went onto say it was for the wrong amount, wrong thing and will send another one.

7:03pm- Ex called for Keith. She hung up because apparently he took too long to get to the phone.

7:09pm- Ex called again, asked Keith if he had gotten the envelope with the check ($446.00) He told her no.

7:17 pm- ex called again. Told Keith she should have sent the check sooner, she just wanted to apologize she’s sure he could have used the money sooner. THEN…

She goes on to the real reason she called, to tattle on me. She asked him if he was aware that I called an old babysitter of hers yesterday. She totally divulged the babysitter’s medical issues and how she probably doesn’t even remember who her kids are. She said the woman’s husband came into her work VERY upset, that I had called.

She said, “It’s embarrassing Keith, I live in a very small town- (24, 009 population)- everybody knows everybody. I’m very embarrassed to have people constantly come up to me and ask me about Patricia (my last name) and “why is she calling me.” The kids are embarrassed by it. It’s not a cool thing to be doing.”

Keith knew, but he just listened to her, acting like he didn’t. LOL.

Met with Court Service Counselor

YIKES! Keith agreed to something he shouldn’t have. His attorney immediately contacted the OTHER party’s attorney and said NOPE, wrong, not agreeing to anything. Contrary to popular belief, It wasn’t MY idea he change his mind, it was his attorney’s because it wasn’t what Keith had requested in his declaration and it his attorney’s job to protect Keith’s rights.

Scheduled another hearing for July 1, 1998.

HAPPY BIRTHDAY!

It’s SD’s birthday, and I called to wish her a Happy Birthday.

Later on, J called to discuss with Keith tickets/airfare for summer visitation. She told him that her ATTORNEY told her to call and ask him if he wants to split airfare 3 ways to include her m other.

K- see what you could find out about airfare

J- No, why don’t you have Patricia call a travel agent and she’ll let the travel agent call for her.

K- we can do that too

J- whatever, but you want to split it 3 ways or not?

K- um, sure.

Between 8:50pm and 9:05pm, calls were placed back and forth.

J called.

K- I can’t do this 3 way thing.

J- Well, then I can’t do middle of the week

K- whatever.

K- hung up

J called back immediately.

J- why did you hang up?

K- I already told you no 3 way thing. I don’t want to do it.

J- why don’t you? Put Pat on the phone- let Pat talk to me!

K- she’s busy- call her later, she’s in the bathroom,

J- let her talk to me about it because she’s the one pulling the strings here-

K- I don’t think so

J-Well I do!

K- Well I don’t think so

J- (inaudible)

K- I don’t think so, not right now, some other time.

L Birthday

Sent L a $15 check and card for her birthday on 6-15-98, then another gift came for her yesterday that I sent to her today. Her birthday is tomorrow.

In a card I wrote to her apologizing that it arrived late, but we didn’t get it until late and it was ordered 4-5 weeks ago. I told her that we will be celebrating her birthday as well as N’s and Sarah and Thomas’s when they get here and that we will have another present for her then. I told her we can hardly wait, we were sooo excited. We hope she has a great birthday and to always remember and never forget that we all love her very much. Take care, God bless her, and talk to her soon.

18 TIMES….REALLY?

Keith called his daughter earlier. He had to ask to speak to her 18 damn times! 18 TIMES!

J was on one, she accused me of influencing Keith’s decision of changing his mind about going to mediation. He just kept eating dinner, asking to speak to his daughter.

J tells him:

J- Better yet, let your wife interfere and make this decision and ruin it all for all of us!

K- you can take and say anything you want, I WANT TO TALK TO HER! (SD)

Just wild!

Declaration of Ex

The ex filed her declaration on June 15th, 1998. Of course she wants more support. She also countered visitation with 4 weeks during the summer, alternating Easter vacation, each and every Fathers Day and alternating Christmas vacation. Keith requested SHE pay for all visitation transportation she she moved with out of state with out his ok or the authorization from the court. SHE’S requesting they “share equally in the cost of transportation.” She also lied in her declaration. My comments are in ( ).

BACKGROUND INFORMATION:

A final Judgment was entered on September 29, 1990. (Um, no it wasn’t. Check the records again.)

VISITATION:

Our final judgment was silent as to the issue of whether I could relocate with our two minor children. Therefore, I consulted with an E. C. attorney who suggested I provide Respondent with thirty days written notice. Accordingly, I followed this attorney’s advise and provided Respondent with thirty days written notice. I sent this notice to Respondent via certified Mail, return receipt requested. I am surprised that Respondent would raise this issue in his Declaration. It appears to me that if Respondent would have had a problem with me relocating he would have raised the issue earlier. It has been 5 years since I relocated. (He did raise the issue, in February 1993, when those court papers were drawn up in February. He didn’t sign them because he didn’t want the kids to leave. He also didn’t have time to consult an attorney because he was shown these papers the weekend of Feb 5th, 1993 and you left, according to a letter to his employer, on or Feb. 12th, 1993. That was the only “documentation” he ever received about your intent to move. He also brought it up again in the November 1995 declaration/letter to your attorney, and that was only 2 years after. You refused to discuss anything but an increase in support. Now in 1998, he brings it up again. That’s 3 times.)

Respondent states in his Declaration that I dictate which visitation Respondent should have. This is not true. (This is VERY true. Letters and phone calls prove that.)

At the beginning of the year, I suggest to Respondent certain dates and times for visitation. Respondent and I then negotiate until we mutually agree upon Respondents visitation schedule for the entire year. (HA! Um, NO, that’s not how that went, at all. YOU preferred visitation be scheduled and paid for upfront annually, and taken care of all at once, because you could afford to do it that way, but that’s not how it went. Visitation was discussed when it was up to you. Whenever Keith was ready to buy the tickets, you weren’t. It was ALWAYS a battle to get the visitation Keith wanted especially during the summer. It was bad enough he had to start sharing his time with your mom, but as far as summer went, what he requested and what he got were two different things. #FACTS.)

Respondent also states that I require him to pay for all costs of visitation. This is not true. Respondent and I have shared equally in the transportation costs for our children since February 1993. ( NOT True. 1993-February – saw kids for 4 days, before you left to Las Vegas to get married then move to WA state. Spring- DENIED- said you could not afford to send them and they were still getting used to the new area. Winter- DENIED. You kept the kids to spend time with your family in SD.

1994- Spring- You kept the kids, Summer- DENIED even though you were sent $400. Tickets were $198 per person. Winter- 4 days, Keith paid $248 for 4 days because you cancelled his two weeks with the kids and gave all but the 4 days to your mom.

1995- Spring-DENIED, Summer- only allowed 2 but took 3 weeks- you, your husband and his son dropped the kids off. On May 22nd, a letter from you was received saying not only that you “have the right to authorize visitation as I see fit…the divorce papers say that visitation is up to me, if you disagree let’s go back to court…” and that Keith would only get the kids from July 2nd- July 15th and that he had to pay full fare, one way for both kids to travel from LA to Sacramento so they can see your mom. When you called 7/1, you asked Keith why he was only keeping the kids until the 15th. You said you had sent another letter telling him if he was had vacation until the 23rd, and when he told you he never got that letter, you said, “Oh, too bad.” One was never sent and you knew that. You ALSO called the cops on Keith and told them he took the kids out of the County of SD and was holding them against their will. Since you had told Keith he could keep them until the 22nd, he kept the kids for a 3rd week, which you took issue with. You said your “contribution to airfare” was your fuel expense bringing the kids to him AFTER your vacation in SD, when it was convenient for you. Keith paid approx. $72.00 (x2) + $35 (UnAccom. Minor Fee)totaling approx $180.00. Winter- DENIED- according to your attorney, you were keeping the kids, you had taken two weeks off work, you were having out of town company coming in. Keith even offered to pay for transportation costs. You said NO)

1996- Got Kids for one week. Keith paid $161. Not sure what you paid though Maybe less, if mileage benefit was applied.. Summer- DENIED. You had already said Keith can have the kids from 8/11 – 8/30. We had to move by 8/12. Keith told you this, and he Keith requested the kids for a week from 8/24- 8/31, still within the time frame you said. You called Keith on 8/20 telling he can’t see the kids, “but there’s always Christmas.” Keith said, “whatever you say, I’ll talk to you later” and hung up. Winter- DENIED- 10/29 you called and asked Keith about splitting airfare 3 ways and splitting his vacation time with the kids, with your mom. He asked if you can buy the tickets and he would reimburse you. You said you had to think about it. He called you on 11/19, you hadn’t decided. 11/24- you said NO.

1997-Spring- got kids for the week. We paid $169 + $10 wire fee to wire you the money. She paid, $169. Summer- got kids 4 weeks. We paid $203 + $10 wire fee to wire you the money. You paid $203. Christmas- Got kids- paid $268+ $10 towards your fuel expense + $10 UAM fee to you. You paid $268. Keith also gave up 3 days of his time with the kids so they can spend time with your family, and quite possibly you too. Fair? Equal? Hardly.

1998- Spring- got kids 1 week- paid $204 +$20 towards her fuel expense to drive from SD to LA. Fair? Equal? Hardly, but again, if he didn’t contribute to your fuel expense, you would not have let him see the kids.)

With respect to Respondent’s requested visitation, I would agree to the following: a) Four (4) weeks during summer vacation; b) Alternating Easter vacation; c) Each and every Father’s Day Weekend; d) Alternating Christmas vacation. I will agree to the above-mentioned visitation schedule and to share equally in the cost of transportation. (each and every Father’s Day Weekend? Really? WHY hasn’t he had the kids Father’s Day ANY year? He IS their Father. OH WAIT, because EVERY year, the 3rd Sunday of June is ALWAYS so Close to your daughter’s birthday, and can’t have Keith celebrating EITHER with his kids, right? Hasn’t happened so far….)

Respondent has additionally requested unobstructed telephone contact with our two children. I have never interfered with any telephone contact nor do I plan to in the future. (CRAZY how your Response Declaration was filed today, 6/15/98. Really? Then WHY did Keith have to ask to speak to his daughter 15- 18 times when he called this evening? Because YOU weren’t obstructing telephone contact huh? I call BS.

CHILD SUPPORT: It is respectfully requested that this court order Guideline child support in the amount of $1,046.00. (based on income, Time share of 10% and Mandatory deductions of Respondents.) (ALL based on incorrect income, according to check stubs. Anything over and above his guaranteed pay is OT which is not readily available.)

Respondent’s Request for Hardship Deduction: It is respectfully requested that Respondent’s request for a hardship be denied. It is not fair to my children that Respondent has recently had a new baby with his current wife, or my responsibility to support his step-daughter. Respondent’s wife’s child and Respondent’s new baby should be supported by Respondent and his new wife. (I do believe he got this hardship)

Tax Filing: (She got it, Keith never mentioned it.)

Spousal Support: I agree that the SD Superior Court should terminate jurisdiction over the issue of spousal support because of my remarriage. (good)

Attorney’s Fees and Court Costs: Due to the substantial disparity between my income and Respondents income, it will be necessary for Respondent to make a reasonable contribution to my attorney’s fees and court costs. A substantial contribution is necessary so that I can properly present my case. Based upon the foregoing, it is respectfully submitted that Respondent make a reasonable contribution toward my attorneys fees and court costs. (Um, you’ve perjured yourself….and it can be proven)

CONCERNING RESPONDENTS REQUEST FOR PERSONAL CONDUCT RESTRAINING ORDER: I have no reason to contact Respondent other than issues dealing with our minor children. In fact, Respondent and I have not communicated verbally in the last three years on any issue, other than the children. On the other hand, it is Respondents new Wife that consistently calls my home, to harass me. (Well, isn’t THAT a bold face lie. THAT can be proven as perjury as well. You have called Keith and berated him because it was MY writing on a box, or because I sent the kids a letter, which you returned, and these incidences happened within the last 3 years. Let’s not get started on your phone calls to ME, personally that are severely harassing.)

Transportation Costs: It is respectfully requested that Respondent and I share equally in all costs of transportation for the purpose of visitation. (you mean, airfare, airport to airport.)

Insurance for the Minor Children: Respondent maintains the primary insurance through his employment and my current husband maintains secondary insurance for our children through his employment. Our prior court order, filed December 21, 1995, requires Respondent and I to share equally in all uncovered medical, dental, orthodontia, vision or psychological costs incurred for the benefit of our minor children. However, Respondent failed and refused to reimburse me any uncovered costs. Therefore, Respondent and I agreed that I would continue to receive the day care in the amount of $100. 00 per month as and for reimbursement toward the uncovered medical costs. Specifically, the cost of our son’s braces was $3,200.00. Respondent has reimbursed me via the day care payment. The day care stopped being incurred in June 1996. (so you got Child Care for 6 months, then continued to keep the $100 for it to go towards your son’s braces. If I’m not mistaken, the $3200 is TOTAL, not after insurance, payments, and discounts, etc. Will have to look more into this. What I DO know, is that you had a hard time sending and at times refused to send copies of the EOB’s from your insurance. You’ve been under the impression that Keith pays what YOU say. That’s not how this works.)

RESTRAINING ORDERS: Respondent has requested that I be restrained with any of his mailings to our children. I have never interfered with any letters, cards, or gifts that Respondent has sent. Respondent also requests that I be restrained from making any disparaging comments about Respondent or his wife. I would never speak negatively about Respondent or his wife in the presence of our children. This would not be in the best interest of our two minor children. Respondent knows that our children come first and I would never do anything to interfere with Respondent’s relationship with our children. (MOST DEFINITELY DEBATABLE. There is proof to the contrary.)

AIRLINE TRANSPORTATION: It is respectfully requested that our children fly out of S for their visitation with Respondent. The reason I am requesting that they fly out of S is because of the substantial decrease in the cost of the airline ticket from S. I do not mind driving the additional four hours in an effort to reduce the cost of transportation. In the event of bad winter, it is impossible for me to drive from (her town) to S because of the road closings. Therefore, in the event the weather does not permit me to drive to S, it is respectfully requested that the children fly out of (her town) or Sp airport. (it seems that more often than not, there would be a long layover or change of planes in S if the kids flew from one of the other more local airports, and that’s what you didn’t want and Keith didn’t feel safe about that either. )

If I were called as a witness in this proceeding, I could and would competently testify to the facts stated herein. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of CA that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed this 6th day of June, 1998, at SD, CA.

Her attorney signed the verification form regarding her Declaration, on June 12th, and it was filed on June 15th.